1 2026:CGHC:16941 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1710 of 2026 Saroj Sahu S/o Shri Chandramn Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o Ward No. 20, Sahu Mohalla, Birra, P.S. Birra, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. (Name Of The Applicant Wrongly Mentioned As Sarol Sahu In The Impugned Order) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.04.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 259/2025 registered at Police Station- Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 112(b), 318 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the basis of information received from the Cyber Cell, Range Janjgir, Police Station Shivrinarayan registered an F.I.R., and during the course of investigation it was found that a total amount of Rs. 31,49,312/- had been deposited in 16 different bank accounts, thereafter, Police Station Shivrinarayan conducted the investigation and arrested the persons who had opened the said accounts as well as those who had assisted them. Further, on the complaint of the complainant, Police Station Shivrinarayan registered Crime No. 259/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 111(2)(b), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., and arrested the present applicant on 03.07.2025 on the allegation that he had also opened such account, and after completion of investigation, filed the charge-sheet dated 30.05.2025 against the present applicant along with 15 other co- accused persons. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged against him and has been falsely implicated in the present crime. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Hamlata Sahu @ Hema, Govinda Patel, and Rahul Sahu have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 13.11.2025, 23.01.2026 and 26.02.2026 in MCRC Nos. 7489/2025, 9642/2025 and 1168/2026 respectively. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is in jail since 03.07.2025 and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, on 20.02.2026 charges were framed and after framing of charge, out of 3 07 prosecution witnesses, no prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though the present applicant along with other co-accused persons involved in the said crime, but other co-accused persons, namely, Hamlata Sahu @ Hema, Vansh Dewangan, Govinda Patel, and Rahul Sahu have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide orders dated 13.11.2025, 11.12.2025, 23.01.2026 and 26.02.2026 in MCRC Nos. 7489/2025, 8911/2025, 9642/2025 and 1168/2026 respectively, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is in jail since 03.07.2025 and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, on 20.02.2026 charges were framed and after framing of charge, out of 07 prosecution 4 witnesses, no prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case, the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Saroj Sahu, involved in Crime No. 259/2025 registered at Police Station- Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 112(b), 318 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 5 during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan